Defensive depth chart pre-draft

[KYPack]

Posted this a few months ago.

I updated it with the new additions and poster thoughts.

DEFENSIVE DEPTH CHART

LDE
Johnny Jolly
Justin Harrell


NT
Ryan Pickett
Fred Bledsoe
A Toribio
Brian Soi

RDE
Cullen Jenkins
Alfred Malone
Michael Montgomery

LOLB
A Kampman
Jeremy Thompson

LILB
A Hawk
D Bishop
S Havner

RILB
Nick Barnett
D Lansanha
B Chillar

ROLB
B Poppinga
J Hunter

RCB
Al Harris
Tramone Williams
Jarrett Bush
Joe Porter

FS
Nick Collins
S Rouse
C Peprah

SS
A Bigby
A Smith

LCB
C Woodson
W Blackmon
P Lee
Joshua Abrams

This makes me think we will add 2-3 backers, 2 DE's and a NT + the usual corner and BPA safeties. We have needs, for sure. Right now, we have 4 NT's and 5 DE's for instance.

[wist43]

TT and MM have been saying they're set at every starter position... and, with MM saying he thinks Desmond Bishop can rush the passer for an OLB position, well...

it's obvious, we have absolutely no needs on that side of the ball :D

[KYPack]

So MM has Bishop penciled in at OLB?

I missed that comment.

Probably LOLB, no?

[wist43]

So MM has Bishop penciled in at OLB?

I missed that comment.

Probably LOLB, no?

He can't possibly really believe that... reporters asked him if they were going to address in the draft, what most of the rest of us see as a glaring hole, i.e. rush LB... and he said he thought they had to the players to get the job done - citing Bishop as an option.

He can't possibly be that delusional??? Can he???

[Gunakor]

TT and MM have been saying they're set at every starter position... and, with MM saying he thinks Desmond Bishop can rush the passer for an OLB position, well...

it's obvious, we have absolutely no needs on that side of the ball :D


Which positions would you say we are not set at with regards to starters? DE, of course, but only because of pending legal issues with Jolly and durability concerns with Jenkins and Harrell. Yet, you can't judge your starters even before OTA's start figuring that they'll surely be injured, thus needing replacement. There's certainly enough talent there to field legitimate starters if everyone is healthy and out of jail, and that's how you evaluate it.

I say we need a new NT, but I'm apparently in the minority there. I just don't like Ryan Pickett there at all, and would rather we draft/sign somebody bigger, stronger, younger and more durable.

Maybe an outside linebacker to compliment Kampman, but that's not a given either. Jeremy Thompson is moving to OLB as well, and he could flourish there same as Kampman could.

These are all things you have to consider when stating specifically that MM and TT are wrong in their assesment of the defense. We need depth on defense, just like any other team does, but I don't think we need new starters as badly as you make it seem.

[Gunakor]

So MM has Bishop penciled in at OLB?

I missed that comment.

Probably LOLB, no?

He can't possibly really believe that... reporters asked him if they were going to address in the draft, what most of the rest of us see as a glaring hole, i.e. rush LB... and he said he thought they had to the players to get the job done - citing Bishop as an option.

He can't possibly be that delusional??? Can he???

What have you seen from Bishop that suggests he can't be a rush OLB? From what I've seen of him, his strength is playing at or behind the LOS. His weakness is dropping into pass coverage. From what I gather Bishop could be a pretty good rush OLB. That position plays to his strengths better than being a 4-3 coverage OLB in a vanilla Sanders scheme did, and I expect to see great improvement in him if he's given that task.

Does this make me delusional?

[Fritz]

Curious, KY - why Lasagna before Chillar? Do you know something we don't? What are you seeing?

[KYPack]

I dunno Wist.

i think Bishop is a pretty good hand. A 3-4 could really help that guy. He could play any one of the 4 spots. Obviously, he need to find a job, but the guy has pretty good potential. As Gun says, I think he's a rush guy. it will take him forever to learn cover, but he can fold back his ears and go, we know that much.

[texaspackerbacker]

Good effort to stimulate discussion, KY.

I think Harrell is in the mix at NT, as well as DE.

At OLB, I'd put Thompson and Hunter--similar players--both on the right--Thompson probably ending up as the starter. I'd have Popinga backing up Kampman, as they are similar players. Chillar also, IMO, will be an OLB. I hadn't heard any McCarthy comment about Bishop at OLB; I doubt that one.

You're probably on target with the DBs and ILBs--except for Chillar.

This all illustrates what I have been saying about the team being fairly solid right now--maybe getting some luxury help from the draft, but few or no necessities.

[KYPack]

Curious, KY - why Lasagna before Chillar? Do you know something we don't? What are you seeing?

No, Fritz.

I don't know anything or know what I'm doing. This whole deal started by me looking at depth charts on the net to get a handle on GB '09 defense. There weren't any, so I made one up. Then I posted it. We all argued it around and came up with this chart. Today, I added the new guys and posted this one.

Lasagna over Chillar is a hold-over from my first list. You are the first sharp-eyed bastard to notice the error. Lasagna should be on the buffet menu and not a main course. I will dutifully make the change when this thread runs out.

You win a chicken leg.

[KYPack]

Good effort to stimulate discussion, KY.

I think Harrell is in the mix at NT, as well as DE.

At OLB, I'd put Thompson and Hunter--similar players--both on the right--Thompson probably ending up as the starter. I'd have Popinga backing up Kampman, as they are similar players. Chillar also, IMO, will be an OLB. I hadn't heard any McCarthy comment about Bishop at OLB; I doubt that one.

You're probably on target with the DBs and ILBs--except for Chillar.

This all illustrates what I have been saying about the team being fairly solid right now--maybe getting some luxury help from the draft, but few or no necessities.
Well thanx, T

The Packers list Harrell as a DE on their new roster. Don't think he will take any snaps at NT

I think Pop is the early starter at ROLB. he's got enough troubles, let alone move him to the other side.

They've said Chillar will get a shot at OLB and ILB, IIRC.

Bishop, he shows potential, he could wind up in a lot of different slots.

The only other thing I think is up for grabs is the S postition. Smith could well be our starter if Bigby can't run.

[Lurker64]

The Packers list Harrell as a DE on their new roster. Don't think he will take any snaps at NT

I think that the Packers would prefer to give every snap at NT to Pickett, but I think that if Pickett has to come off the field for whatever reason, Harrell is the next guy up. He's not prototypical NT size or shape, but he can handle a double-team in the A-gap, which is more than you can say about everybody but Pickett and Harrell on the DL.

I don't think he'll ever be listed there, but I could see him taking 5-10 snaps a game there, just to spell Pickett until the backup NT (whoever it is) demonstrates the ability to handle a double team in the middle.

[rbaloha1]

Bishop needs to be on the field due to his playmaking ability. Yes, Bishop was beaten several times in pass coverage. This is correctable with increased reps.

Recall TT remarking the progress Bishop made from year one to year two. Also felt Bishop is better suited at ilb but if the staff feels otherwise so be it. Maybe a stretch -- but if Bishop bulks up does he have some James Harrison capabilities?

[wist43]

Bishop as a rush LB??? You guys are kidding, right???

I figured the thought was so very laughable that even the homers on this board wouldn't make that leap... good Lord.

[Lurker64]

Bishop is strictly a gap filling, thumping ILB in this defense. It's a good spot for him, but it's not an elite position. If they bring him in to blitz, it's going to be from the inside. He's a solid backup ILB, and a good special teamer. That more than justifies his 6th round pick status and roster spot.

[Patler]

Bishop as a rush LB??? You guys are kidding, right???

I figured the thought was so very laughable that even the homers on this board wouldn't make that leap... good Lord.

I'm not so sure. One of the knocks against Bishop was his tendency toward an unrestrained, aggressive style of play. It can kill him in pass coverage. We saw over-pursuit from him many times. Sometimes, those guys find a home rushing in the 3-4. It can tend to focus their natural style into a single task.

I'm not suggesting he will be successful; none of us know. But it wouldn't necessarily be the most shocking thing if it did turn out for him.

[Waldo]

One thing you guys have to remember. A 3-4 OLB fundamentally is still a linebacker, not a lineman. The DE's do a lot of the heavy lifting typically required of an end.

[Bretsky]

TT and MM have been saying they're set at every starter position... and, with MM saying he thinks Desmond Bishop can rush the passer for an OLB position, well...

it's obvious, we have absolutely no needs on that side of the ball :D


Which positions would you say we are not set at with regards to starters? DE, of course, but only because of pending legal issues with Jolly and durability concerns with Jenkins and Harrell. Yet, you can't judge your starters even before OTA's start figuring that they'll surely be injured, thus needing replacement. There's certainly enough talent there to field legitimate starters if everyone is healthy and out of jail, and that's how you evaluate it.

I say we need a new NT, but I'm apparently in the minority there. I just don't like Ryan Pickett there at all, and would rather we draft/sign somebody bigger, stronger, younger and more durable.

Maybe an outside linebacker to compliment Kampman, but that's not a given either. Jeremy Thompson is moving to OLB as well, and he could flourish there same as Kampman could.

These are all things you have to consider when stating specifically that MM and TT are wrong in their assesment of the defense. We need depth on defense, just like any other team does, but I don't think we need new starters as badly as you make it seem.



I would not be at all disappointed if 80% of this draft focused on defense; I don't think we're incredibly weak anywhere but with the exception of CB I'm not sure I'd consider anything a strength either.

[KYPack]

Bishop probably can't be the chase ILB. But he's perfect as a Jack (or Ted, whatever you call the thump guy inside).
OLB is a gig he coiuld do right, also.
You gotta rememer. Kevin Greene is on this staff. Kevin eyes will light up when he sees Bishop. Kevin can teach him a trick or two and free his mind to just play. Bishop isn't a cover guy and never will be one. he isn't wired that way.

But he is a plugger and will be a real good one.

[sharpe1027]

Posted this a few months ago.

I updated it with the new additions and poster thoughts.

DEFENSIVE DEPTH CHART

LDE
Johnny Jolly
Justin Harrell


NT
Ryan Pickett
Fred Bledsoe
A Toribio
Brian Soi



Wouldn't it make sense for either or both of Jolly and Harrell to backup the NT position?

[Lurker64]

Wouldn't it make sense for either or both of Jolly and Harrell to backup the NT position?

Neither guy is ever going to be a full time starting NT, but I think if Pickett has to come out for a series, Harrell's the guy that takes his place, but he's not going to be able to do it for a whole game, so that doesn't really play into the depth chart.

[wist43]

Lurker and KY have it right... Bishop is a plugger, and that's about it. If he were anything more than that, he would have been a higher draft choice - the guy can't run, he's stiff, relatively unathletic... he is what he is, a 6th round draft choice, who plays like a 6th round draft choice.

And I don't care if Kevin Greene, Lawrence Taylor, Dick Butkus, and Ray Nitschke were all coaching him... they can't make him any faster, or taller, or give him longer arms... they guy will never be a rush OLB.

And that was my point... it's ridiculous to even entertain the idea - and, as I said, I can only hope that MM is just doing the media dance, and doesn't really believe that nonsense - coz if he does??? We're completely screwed on defense.

[Lurker64]

And that was my point... it's ridiculous to even entertain the idea - and, as I said, I can only hope that MM is just doing the media dance, and doesn't really believe that nonsense - coz if he does??? We're completely screwed on defense.

I secretly suspect that MM really has very little to do with the defense, other than hiring the staff. I would suspect that Dom has mostly complete autonomy when it comes to the defense, and really I wouldn't be totally surprised if Dom lines up Bishop outside once or twice. It doesn't make sense, but a lot of the advantages of the 3-4 defense is that you can send a lot of guys from a lot of different directions. To keep the offense guessing, and sometimes you do something that doesn't make a lot of sense, just to throw the offense off. I mean, I've seen New England line up in 0-8-3 fronts on Rushing downs, which isn't something that you'd want to do more than once or twice, but it sure confuses the blocking assignments.

I mean, Capers was one of the men who came up with the Zone Blitz, the basic principle of which involves dropping a defensive lineman into coverage; something which, in and of itself, seems ridiculous. But it works.

[wist43]

And that was my point... it's ridiculous to even entertain the idea - and, as I said, I can only hope that MM is just doing the media dance, and doesn't really believe that nonsense - coz if he does??? We're completely screwed on defense.

I secretly suspect that MM really has very little to do with the defense, other than hiring the staff. I would suspect that Dom has mostly complete autonomy when it comes to the defense, and really I wouldn't be totally surprised if Dom lines up Bishop outside once or twice. It doesn't make sense, but a lot of the advantages of the 3-4 defense is that you can send a lot of guys from a lot of different directions. To keep the offense guessing, and sometimes you do something that doesn't make a lot of sense, just to throw the offense off. I mean, I've seen New England line up in 0-8-3 fronts on Rushing downs, which isn't something that you'd want to do more than once or twice, but it sure confuses the blocking assignments.

I mean, Capers was one of the men who came up with the Zone Blitz, the basic principle of which involves dropping a defensive lineman into coverage; something which, in and of itself, seems ridiculous. But it works.

Creating confusion is one of the principle reasons I've been an advocate of a 3-4; showing multiple fronts, delayed blitzes, zone blitzes, et al... The scheme in and of itself should allow even a slug like Bishop to come free every once in a while.

That said, there is no substitute for talent... and, even if Capers is able to stop the bleeding on the defensive side of the ball, and at least field an average unit, without an infusion of some top flight 3-4 personnel, i.e. a maniac rush OLB, a stud NT, and an upgrade at DE, they're going to continue to struggle.

Bottom line, their front 7 is the very definition of pedestrian.